Europe experienced widespread relief on Monday, as the crisis caused by the presentation of a new 28-article proposal for resolving the conflict appeared – temporarily – to have been defused. A Washington representative spoke of "substantial progress" after Ukraine-US talks in Geneva. On Monday night, the Kremlin made its response: another massive barrage of aerial bombardment on Kyiv.
The Cycle of Peace Talks and Military Action
The sequence of contrasting events captured the bleak nature of the outgoing year. By day, negotiation efforts are conducted: optimistic declarations are delivered from multiple capitals. Significant resources is expended on restraining specific proposals. By night, Russian leadership clearly shows the world that, for them, military action persists as the key method for achieving "resolution".
After-Dark Attacks
As the offensive unfolded into the early hours of Tuesday, the immediate reality of Ukraine's vulnerability was laid bare. Ukraine is able to track projectile deployments from across the border, a capacity provided through current data. From vantage locations, military aircraft that had been scrambled to engage hostile aerial threats streaked across the sky – sophisticated military planes delivered to Ukraine by NATO members.
Shortly after, Kyiv's anti-aircraft weapons activated: defensive missiles deployed against a incoming threat. This was a sophisticated defense system at work, probably provided by Western nations. Every launch jolts you unexpectedly, causing tremors. The moment of terror quickly gives way to resigned acknowledgment: perhaps the approaching threat won't hit its mark this time, sparing the city from catastrophe and additional electricity failures.
Continuous Dangers
Not long after, a heavy machine gun fired at a drone in the vicinity, part of a mobile-fire group – most likely Western-made equipment. Regrettably, the bullets missed the hostile drone – it maintained course toward its target.
Intermittently, this carried on until dawn. Kyiv faced the morning news: seven people killed, devastation and infrastructure problems in numerous residences as a result of the nocturnal offensive. As customarily, everyone still maintained normal activities – enduring hostilities. But those full day encapsulated Ukraine's essential dependence on external assistance – a dependence that European nations are demonstrably unable to replace in the short term.
Ineffective Peace Efforts
The detailed framework from US administration sparked intense emotion, controversy and serious worry – and temporarily diverted attention from Ukraine's most significant graft case in years. Yet, we have experienced comparable situations, after previous diplomatic encounters and multilateral gatherings.
Every new initiative from American administration adheres to the identical sequence: a negotiation push against Ukraine, which Kyiv, with other European capitals, succeeds in resisting. They manage the tension but never actually secure success. This trend will, undoubtedly, persist.
Strategic Calculations
It is tempting to accuse specific actors of persistently promoting Russian terms. But that does not seem to be the complete picture. American leadership functions according to a principle understood by international relations experts: you cannot win at the negotiating table what you have lost on the battlefield. The American government assumes that it is unfeasible to compel Moscow to relinquish the areas that it already controls in Ukraine's south or east.
The problem is that while accepting these circumstances, US leadership does nothing to prevent Kremlin actions, through diplomacy or military means, from thinking that the status quo will not evolve additionally in its favour in the months ahead.
Conflicting Perspectives
Therefore, Russian leadership is convinced that time is on his side – that Ukraine and its partners are coming close to fatigue. Their incentive to accept conditions that does not give them the maximum possible gain is close to zero. There may be multiple initiatives to achieve ceasefire, but they will carry on as long as Russia's leadership remains highly assured in the outcome.
On the contrary, Ukrainian leadership believes that Ukraine can still endure, progressively conceding people and territory but avoiding a complete military breakdown until conditions improve in its benefit.
Present Conditions
Factually, there are no real preconditions for a armistice. Now, personal considerations are coming into play: personal goals to negotiate peace and obtain worldwide acknowledgment, and Kyiv's twin challenges – on one hand, not to estrange crucial supporters, and on the other, to mobilize citizens around the flag against any plan Kyiv finds unacceptable, so that their priority does not move to homefront challenges. And although their task will now be significantly challenging after latest incidents, it remains highly unlikely that this will alter their fundamental strategy.
These opposing factors are influencing discussions.
Assessment and Future
It took a just a single week to eliminate the 28 points of the current initiative. Forceful and unpredictable management of the matter by American leadership, opposition by Ukraine and the remaining European nations, along with calming attempts of diplomats, and finally, latest revelations, all served their function.
While new plans based on old ideas are forthcoming, Kyiv, London and other European capitals should arrive at a critical understanding: Ukraine and Europe will only be able to counter political attacks from Washington that are rooted in Kremlin requirements and show particular unwillingness to modify developments, if they remain united and enhance their military capacity at a considerably quicker tempo. If they do, neither political nor armed coercion will be able to overcome them. In the meantime, Ukraine's capability to defend against evening bombardments will, for the foreseeable future, largely rely on sustained allied backing.
